Anne Nicole Smith-DOA.

[Stilgar]

yeah, it's fucking amazing the amount of hoops people will jump through to lose weight.

Hoops that are neither exercise or eating right.

I mean, for 99.9% of people, your body weight works just like an equation.

fat = calories eaten - calories burnt

It's obviously a bit more complicated than that, but come the fuck on, people! You're not going to eat a fucking pill and look like a model. Eat less, do more. It's not fucking rocket science.

[BRP]

Apparently there is video of her dying.

[Duckroll]

Good thing this isn't Australia where they would destroy things like that, "Out of respect".

[Stilgar]

it'd be the only respect she ever got.

[Kyreth]

Believing in any form of afterlife is just silly. It's fairy tales for grown-ups, basically. I don't know why it's still believed in this age, but whatever. Humans are generally stupid. When you're dead, that's it. Also, I think someone has the right to end their own life if they so choose. Nobody wants to suffer.

skylar
Melee SMN
Joined: 13 Sep 2005
Posts: 12
Location: Dante's 6th circle of Hell

Just thought that was amusing, considering the subject. Heresy!

[Jujubie]

Anna Nicole Smith is dead, the apparent victim of a drug overdose, multiple sources confirm exclusively to PerezHilton.com.

oh my GOD I can't believe it.

I <3 Perez!

[Septimus]

It's a shame Anna had to die.

But she wasn't exactly a model citizen, wife, or mother.

She was the highest profile gold digger in history.

But that all being said, and as much as I loathed her, its a shame she had to pass on.

Nope, that title goes to Heather Mills McCartney since Paul McCartney is worth around 1.5 billion dollars.

[Pamelita]

=( It's a shame.

[Slapper]

It's a shame Anna had to die.

But she wasn't exactly a model citizen, wife, or mother.

She was the highest profile gold digger in history.

But that all being said, and as much as I loathed her, its a shame she had to pass on.

Nope, that title goes to Heather Mills McCartney since Paul McCartney is worth around 1.5 billion dollars.

Didn't J. Howard Marshall(anna nicoles former husband..old dude) have more than that?

[Norelco]

Maybe she OD'd on TrimSpa.

[Pamelita]

It's a shame Anna had to die.

But she wasn't exactly a model citizen, wife, or mother.

She was the highest profile gold digger in history.

But that all being said, and as much as I loathed her, its a shame she had to pass on.

Nope, that title goes to Heather Mills McCartney since Paul McCartney is worth around 1.5 billion dollars.

Didn't J. Howard Marshall(anna nicoles former husband..old dude) have more than that?

Nope, I think he was worth $500 million.

[Aeromyth]

Believing in any form of afterlife is just silly. It's fairy tales for grown-ups, basically. I don't know why it's still believed in this age, but whatever. Humans are generally stupid. When you're dead, that's it. Also, I think someone has the right to end their own life if they so choose. Nobody wants to suffer.

And exactly how does suicide make others care for you after your death in a way they wouldn't have to if you died of natural causes?

PASCAL'S WAGER

Therefore, we are faced with the following possibilities:

* You believe in God.
o If God exists, you go to heaven: your gain is infinite.
o If God does not exist, your loss (the investment in your mistaken belief) is finite and therefore negligible.
* You do not believe in God.
o If God exists, you go to hell: your loss is infinite and your gain is zero.
o If God does not exist, your gain is finite and therefore negligible.

With these possibilities, and the principles of statistics, Pascal hoped to have demonstrated that the only prudent course of action is to believe in God. It is a simple application of game theory (to which Pascal had made important contributions).

Another way of portraying the Wager is as a decision under uncertainty with the values of the following decision matrix:
God exists (G) God does not exist (~G)
Belief in God (B) +∞ (heaven) −N (finite)
Non-belief in God (~B) −∞ (hell) +M (finite)

Dont be an atheist moron. People are quite reasonable in their belief of any god or any afterlife. If you were a reasonable person you would hold some positive belief in a God and/or and afterlife.
Failing that... The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[Stilgar]

Believing in any form of afterlife is just silly. It's fairy tales for grown-ups, basically. I don't know why it's still believed in this age, but whatever. Humans are generally stupid. When you're dead, that's it. Also, I think someone has the right to end their own life if they so choose. Nobody wants to suffer.

And exactly how does suicide make others care for you after your death in a way they wouldn't have to if you died of natural causes?

PASCAL'S WAGER

Therefore, we are faced with the following possibilities:

* You believe in God.
o If God exists, you go to heaven: your gain is infinite.
o If God does not exist, your loss (the investment in your mistaken belief) is finite and therefore negligible.
* You do not believe in God.
o If God exists, you go to hell: your loss is infinite and your gain is zero.
o If God does not exist, your gain is finite and therefore negligible.

With these possibilities, and the principles of statistics, Pascal hoped to have demonstrated that the only prudent course of action is to believe in God. It is a simple application of game theory (to which Pascal had made important contributions).

Another way of portraying the Wager is as a decision under uncertainty with the values of the following decision matrix:
God exists (G) God does not exist (~G)
Belief in God (B) +∞ (heaven) −N (finite)
Non-belief in God (~B) −∞ (hell) +M (finite)

Dont be an atheist moron. People are quite reasonable in their belief of any god or any afterlife. If you were a reasonable person you would hold some positive belief in a God and/or and afterlife.
Failing that... The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

LOL, get that shit out of here. You think that any omnipotent, omniscient God wouldn't know that you 'decided to believe' just so you weren't given eternal punishment?

You think that you can just 'decide to believe' something at all, ever? Do you believe your own lies?

[The Blackrose]

Good thing this isn't Australia where they would destroy things like that, "Out of respect".

I highly doubt that considering who that video was about.

I also love how people here went "romgz you should respect her becuz she died." My opinion lies along the same lines as Gares. Oh, and I hope you bleeding hearts didn't stop by the Fark thread (because apparently we're spawns of Satan or something).

[Aeromyth]

Well now, i dont think you can simply decide to believe something. If you do believe, an argument such as this is reasonable grounds to reject the absence of evidence argument set forth by anti-theists. Also, why wouldn't it be reasonable to act in this instance out of fear? Instinctually we make many reasonable decisions out of fear, in our best interest. Belief in a God for fear of punishment is reasonable.

People thought the world was flat in the greater part of what we know to be the scholarly world for a great deal of history. They were wrong, it didn't mean they were liars.

[Devek]

Atheist crack me up because they always try to act like they are smarter than everyone but the irony is that they never fully thought through what they are actually saying.

Atheist claim they can disprove the existence of God and they usually do it by finding fault with religion. For being so "intelligent" you think they would figure out the faulty logic there.

Lets say the bible is completely made up.. now go out at night at night and look at the sky and tell me that man is the biggest baddest thing in the universe.

The worst part about atheist is how they behave in person. Their "I'm better than you because I know the 'truth' and you're a fool!" attitude is the exact same attitude they accuse religious people of having (which kind of proves that religion has nothing to do with being a jackass).

At some point you gotta grow out of it and accept your own ignorance. I consider myself agnostic because I simply don't know. There may or may not be a God. Christians may or may not be right. I don't know I can't offer any real scientific evidence that supports any case because there really isn't any at this point.

[Ryko]

^ Bingo, fully accepting that everyone's view of life is going to differ, being atheist isn't a damn fashion statement. It's ironic how incredibly arrogantly and obnoxiously ignorant some of the bible bashers can be. That isnt to say I'm defending it, I find it an inherently flawed belief and the bible even more ridiculous in terms of trying to guide your life by but I'm willing to accept that I'm probably not the end-all be-all of universal knowledge.

For the record, I believe there's a god, I just don't like him very much.

[Fhqwghads]

I don't believe in god. That doesn't mean I 100% disbelieve the possibility that a higher power exists. However, common sense screams at me that the typical definition of god has about as much chance as existing as pink elephants with hippos standing on their backs holding up the known universe. There's about enough supporting evidence for a christian god as there is for zeus, allah, thor, and every other god-like creation man has thought up since the dawn of time. With that in mind, who's to say which is right, or if any of them are? There's not enough to go on, and the reality I choose to believe in is that there is no life after death, and humans invented all this god/afterlife nonsense to help them get through life without feeling as if the journey is pointless. I don't blame them for doing it; ceasing to exist is a scary proposition.

The only problem is fear of death has facilitated the institution of various religions, which as history shows has been and still is the root of countless wars and billions of deaths. That's really my biggest pet peeve with religions (other than the fact that people have a tendency to just blindly follow what their religious leaders tell them.) Not that religion is strictly linked to believing in god, but the ties are definitely close.

The big issue is the law of probability. With an undefined size to the universe and undefined dimensions, how can anyone state empirically that there is no such thing as a higher power? You really can't without looking like a fool. My own thoughts are there's about a 0.0000000000001% chance that there's a higher power out there responsible for everything. It's an incredibly small percentage, but it's there. Certainly not enough for me to believe the crap that man has come up with so far with regards to their concept of "god", but I won't deny that there is still a slight chance that a higher power is out there somewhere.

[Roranora]

Atheist crack me up because they always try to act like they are smarter than everyone but the irony is that they never fully thought through what they are actually saying.

Atheist claim they can disprove the existence of God and they usually do it by finding fault with religion. For being so "intelligent" you think they would figure out the faulty logic there.

...

The worst part about atheist is how they behave in person. Their "I'm better than you because I know the 'truth' and you're a fool!" attitude is the exact same attitude they accuse religious people of having (which kind of proves that religion has nothing to do with being a jackass).

...

Oh well if this is a pretty in-depth derail of this thread, people thought we were giving Anna too much attention anyway...



Generally speaking, I'd say that atheists take far more contentment out of people believing whatever they wish so long as conscious thought was applied to obtain one's beliefs. It's true with me, but if that isn't the majority of atheists, then pushing the lack of a belief is hypocritical due to the loathing atheists would have with pushing any given religion there is out there now. (most of them all starting at likely the same source, molding and changing slightly given geography, time, and culture) If, however, it is true, (which is my guess) then you're completely off-base with the accusation that athiests feel the need to "disprove" any God, and certainly by finding fault with religion. If there is a fault, it's certainly up to the individual to feel that way, or not feel that way. I see a huge problem with religion, but you speak as if that's a bad thing; there's really no gain from belittling anyone for not seeing as I see. And usually, if someone does, it may be a much more simple topic than religion: insecurity.

Speaking of which, doesn't the main irony occur at that point? Why would anyone feel so compelled to insist he/she is -right- about a topic that, as a whole, our species can't really grasp? If anything, it insists to me insecurity/doubt in the accuser's own stance. Is the extreme close-mindedness of christians much less elite than that of the sects we're currently fighting? When I tell any narrow-minded christian from the midwest I'm an atheist, you should see the look I get. It's not a far cry from your "I'm better than you..." description. I'd say christians are much more known for finding fault in a belief not theirs than atheists are. Believe as you will, you won't get insults from me in that regard.. unless of course you're insulted by hearing my own view.

Lets say the bible is completely made up.. now go out at night at night and look at the sky and tell me that man is the biggest baddest thing in the universe.

Choosing to agree or disagree with current science at any point you wish, begin asking yourself a system of questions to determine the source of anything, with the following question asking about the previous question's answer. Usually at some point, you'll reach an uncertainty, and it's in this uncertainty we feel the need to insert something, an explanation, a thought.. a belief. Why, I'm not sure. Perhaps it's egotistic nature in its purest form, when some have to so adamantly believe their insertion is the correct/better one. You closed with a much better point than you opened, I believe. There's nothing wrong with uncertainty itself, however, realize that Christianity, your main example, is just a random insertion, one several thousand years old at that. It doesn't do it for me, and sadly, we'll likely all long be dead and forgotten before there is any being that can even begin to fathom the universe, much less its birth. (which is too bad.. I bet there is something absolutely amazing beyond words out there to grasp still)


This may all be wasted typing for Devek, but if you think, I'm one, "always trying to act like I'm smarter than everyone," two, claiming I "can disprove the existence of a God", or three, insisting I'm better than you.. then I'm at a loss of words. I simply don't think atheists deserve those above accusations that personally drove me away from religion more than religious people do, namely christians.

[Roranora]

Why are people saying atheists are a more inclined group of people to bash someone's beliefs than religious people are?

I'm going to assume, it's either one of two possibilities.

#1. The internet. The biggest badasses in the world reside here and any "religion is stupid"-esque debate could only end with insults regarding competence.

#2. As a general statement, albeit potentially unfair or wrong, (I'm acknowledging that right now) those strongly religious are so offended by the fact that people can live their lives refusing the current concept of a god that they have no other way to perceive an atheist statement other than assuming he/she was an asshole, rude, or insulting.